Md.Salawoddin Vs Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus decladng the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1|122(B)12024-RM.NZB dated.03l02l2O25 issued by the 2nd respondent -calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No.2 of lndira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, without reconsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease, and contrary to directions issued by this Honourable Court in WP No.176012025 dated.24101l202S, is highty illegal, arbitrary. unjust, unconstitutional, and in violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioners case is concerned, and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the license period for remaining period of five (5) years in respect of subject stall.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1l122(8)12024RM.NZB dated.O3lO2l2025 issued by the 2nd respondent to extent of petitioners case is concerned, by directing the respondents to extend the license to the petitioner for remaining period of five (5) years from 01101120115 onwards in respect of DOT Stall No.2 of lndira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRT Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.ANURAG, SC FOR TSRTC

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

lil

¶23

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶24

WRIT PETITION 0.3984 0F 2(J25

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R.Anurag, tearned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶27

2. The oetitioner aDDroache the Court seekino Draver

¶28

as under:

¶29

"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1l122(8)/2O24-RM:NZB dated 03.O2.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No.2 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, without reconsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease, and contrary to directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in WP No.1760/2025 dated:24.01.2025, is highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, and in violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioner's case is concerned, and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the license period for remaining^period of five (5)^years

¶30

2

¶31

SN,J wp 3984²⁰²⁵

¶32

in respect^{of subject stall, and to pass sucl'l other order} or orders^{as this Hon'ble Courtmay deems fit and} proper in the^{clrcumstances of the case'"}

¶33

The case of^{the petitioner' in brief is that the petitioneris} the lease^{holder of the shop of Indira RTC Bus Stand' Uanswada} and he^{is doingbusiness at road margin of RTC Bus S;tand' In} the^{year, 2CtO7, lo remove the road margin vendors and for the} expansion^{cf road, the Government promised the petitioner to} allot shops^{in the newlyconstructed building underDOT Scheme} for a^{period of twenty (20) years' for whichthe petitioner} agreed.^{After completionof construction of shops, initially,the} petitioner was^{granted the lease for a period of five (5) yearson} a fair^{monthly rent and the said lease was extendedfrom time to} time, and^{utas valid till the end of December' 2024 'IL is further} the case^{of the petitioner that the petitioneris further r:ntitledfor} getting rernaining^{five (5) yearslease i'e'' upto' Decernber'2029} as^{per rescrlutionNo.133/2007, dated 24'lO'2007 ' however' the} said lease^{is not being extended' Though this Court vide its order} dated^{24.O1.2025 inW'P'No'1760 of2025' directedthe} respondents^{tore-considerthe case of the pet'itioner for} extensionofleaseforfurtherperiodoffiveyearsupto

__.1

3

SN,J wp_3984 2025

December, 2029 within^{a period of two (O2) weeksfrom the date} of the said order and till^{such time, the respondents were} directed not to dispossess the^{petitionerfrom the subjectstall,} the respond ent-corporatio n^{issuedManualTender Notification} vide Case No.C1l122(8) /2024-RM:NZB^{dated 03.02'2025 calling} up fresh tender in^respect of^{the DOTStall No'2 of IndiraRTC} Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy^{District'Aggrieved by the} said action of the^{respondent-corporatio n, which is in clear} violation of the orders of^{this Court, dated 24.O1.2025passedin} W.P.No.1760 of 2025,^{the petitionerfiled the presentwrit} petition.

¶38

Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel^{for TSRTC} appearing on behalf of the respondents^{placed on record the} proceedings dated 07.01.2025 vide^{No.LCl785(70)/2024-} RM:NZB of the Regional^{Manager, Nizamabadi'e', respondent} No.2 herein and contends^{that the order of this Court dated} 24.01.2025^passed in^{W.P'No.1760of 2025 had been duly} complied with and the^{request of the petitionerfor extension of} lease^period of DOT^{stalls for anotherfive years in accordanceto} law had been reconsidered^{by the respondent corporationduly} considering the specific^{plea of the petitionerthat the petitioner}

¶39

4

¶40

SN,J w_'.\984²⁰²⁵

¶41

had contribut:ed certain^{amountsfor constructionof shops and} approprlate reasoned^{orders had been passed and tct ensure} transparency and^{fairness,it is just and necessary that auction} needs to be conducted^{and the request of the oetltionerto run} petltioner's business for a further^{periodof five years, citnnot be} a cce^pted.

¶42

Tak into n idera

¶43

a) The submissions^{made by the learned cotinsel} appearing on behalf of the^{petitionerand the} learned Standing Counsel^{for TSRTCappearing on} behalf of the respondent-corporation^and,

¶44

b) The^proceedings of^{respondentNo.2 dated} 07.AL.2025 vide No.LC/7A5(7O)/2O24-RM:NzB issued in compliance to^{the orders of this Court} dated 24.01.2O25^{passedin w'P.No.L76O ot 2025,}

¶45

The writ petition is disposed^{of givingliberty to the} petitioner to challenge the said^{proceedingsdated} 07.OL.2025 issued by the^{respondent No.2-Regional} Manager, TGSRTC, Nizamabad.^Inview of^{the fact as} borne on record that^{the proceedingsof the respondent}

t

,r,, wp 3984 2025

l l )

.ia ,,

No.2 dated 07.OL.2:O2S^{had been issued in pursuanceto} the petitioner approaching^{this Court by filing the present} writ petation, a reasonable^{period of one (O1) week from} the date of receipt^{of a copyof this order is granted to the} petitioner to^pursue the^{petitioner'sremedies'The} respondents are^{directednot to take any coercivesteps} agaanst the^{petitioner for a period of one (O1) week from} the date of^{receipt of a copy of this order to enable the} petitioner to^{pursue the remediesas are availableto the} petitioner against the^{order of the 2"d respondent dated} 07.OL.2O25.^{However, there shall be no order as to costs'}

¶51

As a sequel,^{themiscellaneous petitions' if}

¶52

any^{pending.in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed'}

¶53

SD/.K.SRE ERAMA^MURTHY AS s ANT REGISTRAR /TTRUE^COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶54

To 1 lvlanaoinq Director,^{Telangana State RoadTransport corporation'Bus} e hava;n,^{-RTC-X-Road,Hyderaba0} N iza mabad,^{Nizamabad Df.]r!4.} . i . $i [flfr^{U#f,€f, 3t :5#;#neffi I r:n:',"'s%BrEi'}

¶55